Tagged: asset management

Hidden Failures in Lubrication programs: Designing a Resilient Lubrication Strategy Part 3

Before you begin to design a resilient lubrication strategy, you need to know where your current lubrication strategy falls as per industry standards. You can review part 1 in this series where we break down the various levels of maturity for lubrication programs. Afterwards, determine your hidden failure modes which you can read about in part 2 of our series.

As a quick refresher, here are the various maturity levels for lubrication programs.

Varying-levels-of-Maturity-for-Lubrication-Programs_870x460 (1) — Figure 1: Varying levels of Maturity for Lubrication Programs

Once the current lubrication program level is identified, we then need to audit the systems that we have in place to understand what gaps need to be filled. While wanting to achieve level 5 is always the goal, we also must be cognizant of our constraints. Within our industry, some constraints which typically exist include; budget, manpower, resources and time. Each of these have crucial roles to play in determining the success of our lubrication program.

Closing the gaps

Once your gaps have been identified, this is not the end of the story. We need to put procedures and strategies in place to make sure that we can close these gaps. This is where we get to re-evaluate work orders, ensure that they are now being aligned with our condition monitoring programs and design our systems to have proper lube routes as well as frequencies or relubrication with the correct lubricant.

After auditing our condition monitoring program (which forms part of the lubrication program), we should also assign dedicated personnel for interpretation of oil analysis results as well as sampling. Being able to access consistent data and trending will help us to understand our equipment better and possibly detect failures before they occur.

Part of auditing of condition monitoring program includes setting up alarm limits within our system which are aligned to our equipment and environment. While the lab will have the standard set of alarms, we should take a closer look at what really resonates with our equipment. For instance, if we start seeing a spike in copper right after a turnaround where certain parts were changed, then this may be normal and just break in wear. However, the lab may flag it as a component failing (if we did not provide them with adequate details).

Contamination

One of the biggest sources of failures for our equipment is contamination. By designing our lubrication program to eliminate sources of contamination (within or control), we can essentially minimize equipment failure. Most contamination can happen during oil transfer to equipment where the oil may either be placed in dirty containers, or have contaminants enter their packaging from improper storage conditions.

By designing our lubrication program to address contamination and have measured results as goals for our program, we can improve our systems. Without clear cleanliness targets we cannot evaluate the impact of reducing contamination. Desiccant breathers and proper sealing techniques can also help in reducing the ingress of contaminants into the system.

Training and Accountability

Designing a lubrication program must also include the training of the employees to execute the program. They are the ones responsible for its success and if not trained or briefed about the importance of their assigned roles, then they will not bring the value to the program and unfortunately, it will fail.

By allocating responsibilities to employees and having them accountable for these roles it brings some form of ownership into the program. This allows the program to thrive more as they are genuinely invested in making it a success. Once they have been trained, they can in turn continue to spread the word about lubrication and best practices to their peers.

oil-analysis-test-to-identify-health-of-lubricant_870x460 — Figure 2: Oil Analysis Tests which can be performed to identify health of lubricant

Essentially, we can have hidden failures in our lubrication programs, but we can uncover these and redesign our program to become a success through auditing and putting proper strategies in place. Next time you think about your lubrication program, explore its robustness and think about ways in which you can improve it to ensure that it is adding to the value that it should.

Find the full article, "Hidden Failures in Lubrication programs: Designing a Resilient Lubrication Strategy Part 3" featured on LUDECA's blog by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

Lubricant Degradation / Reliability / Storage & Handling of Lubricants

Hidden Failures in Lubrication programs: Failure Modes Which Are Not Being Monitored Part 2

In part 1 of this series, we took a closer look at the Illusion of a Good Lubrication Program. One of the key findings was that through audits, failure modes were not being monitored actively or in some cases not at all. In this part of the series, we will do a deeper dive into the failure modes that can be missed with lubrication programs.

Critical but not obvious failure modes

With our standard oil analysis programs, there are a few key tests that can indicate the health of an asset. These include; viscosity, presence of wear metals, contaminants, additives, moisture levels and cleanliness levels (ISO 4406). From these tests, we can easily identify if we may have some cause for investigation or concern.

If there are changes in viscosity this can be an indication of a few different things. A decrease in viscosity can indicate that there is possible contamination with fuel or even thermal cracking of the lubricant. However, if the viscosity increases, this can indicate contamination with water (or another higher viscosity grade lubricant, accidentally) or the presence of oxidation degrading the lubricant.

The presence of wear metals can indicate that there is wear occurring within your components. However, there are varying limits depending on the type of oil and the application in which it is being used. For instance, the alarm limit for iron in diesel engines is usually around 60ppm while the alarm limit for iron in gearboxes is closer to 300ppm (this will vary by OEM). As such, it is important to set appropriate alarm limits for various components and oils depending on their applications and environments.

If there is the presence of contaminants, this can easily flag that something is getting into the system (either via an external or internal source) which shouldn’t be there. Contaminants can also act as catalysts to speed up degradation of lubricants. Again, they have varying limits depending on application and type of oil, but they should be monitored.

By understanding the concentration of additives and observing their trends, we can also determine if wear is occurring (by the decline in antiwear additives) or if oxidation is happening (by the decline in antioxidants). By quantifying the concentration of additives, we can also determine if there was possible contamination with another lubricant (if an element shows up which should not be there!). Through the monitoring of additives, we can quickly determine the internal conditions that the lubricant is exposed to, whether or not wear is occurring and if contamination is present.

Assessing the Gap

These tests can give an indication of what’s happening inside your oil before the failures occur. Through proper trending and by establishing alarm limits which can warn users in time, failures can be avoided. This is the value of developing a robust lubrication program where impending failures can be detected, avoided and uncovered before they cause any harm to our system.

Stay tuned for part 3 where we dive into designing a resilient lubrication strategy.

Find the full article, "Hidden Failures in Lubrication programs: Failure Modes which are not being Monitored Part 2" featured on LUDECA's blog by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

Lubricant Degradation / Reliability / Storage & Handling of Lubricants

Hidden Failures in Lubrication programs: The Illusion of a Good Lubrication Program Part 1

Typically, when lubrication programs are developed and implemented, everyone automatically believes that all lubrication issues have been solved and will never occur again. This is furthest from the truth! In this 3-part series, we will explore some of the hidden failures in lubrication programs. We will start off with dispelling the illusion of a good program then dive deeper into the failure modes which are not being monitored and finally, ways to design a resilient lubrication strategy.

How “good’ is good?

Many manufacturing plants have some form of a lubrication program in place. But many are not familiar with how to gauge this against best practices or industry standards. The following figure gives a brief description of the various stages of a lubrication program that can exist.

Although many plants may fall within the L2-L4 stages (and some in the L1 stage), there is still a lot of data missing on the documentation on lubrication failures and how these are being addressed (if they are being addressed at all). As such, there are no direct actionable items that link failures to strategies for preventing these in the future.

Industry standards attribute that around 33% of bearing failures are due to lubrication challenges. However, if our lubrication program is not capturing these lubrication related failures then the real root causes are not being addressed directly for these issues. As such, they are not being solved and we are adding to the overall unreliability of the plant. In these instances, our lubrication program is not adding value from a reliability perspective and is actually hiding some failures.

The real failures

Lubrication can account for a significant number of failures, but contamination also plays a crucial role. As per a study carried out by NRCC & STLE (National Research Council Canada & Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers), particle induced failures are responsible for approximately 82% of failures. This means that our equipment is majorly failing because of contamination.

In our “Defined” maturity level 3 program, contamination is not even addressed. Hence, we could be missing the opportunity to remove this from our system and by extension reduce failures associated with contamination. With our level 3 program, we also do not have alarm limits for our oil tests to help us understand if we are approaching dangerous levels or not. This will cause us to miss opportunities where we could have prevented components from failure.

Even with a moderately tiered lubrication program, we are missing a lot of opportunities for improvement of the overall reliability of our plant. This can lead to the lubrication program being viewed as unsuccessful when in fact, it just didn’t capture the right data.

Apart from capturing data, we also need to act on that data. Even if we have an oil analysis program in place, if we are not trending the data or coordinating with our maintenance teams to troubleshoot potential issues, then the lubrication program is not helping to raise the reliability of the plant. The program is in fact hiding some of these inefficiencies.

When was your last audit?

Even though we may have built a lubrication program, have we audited it? Creating a lubrication program may be an easy feat for many but implementing it is another story in itself. This is where some programs fail because they exist on paper but not in practice. If our technicians are not collecting the right data or observing proper storage and handling techniques, then the lubrication program is just another piece of paper in the drawer collecting dust.

For those who have managed to get the lubrication program off the ground and have the right people integrated into it, an audit on the program is still a good idea. Sometimes when these programs are launched, the personnel responsible are excited to implement the new strategies but complacency can easily step in. This is when the quality of the results of the program can erode.

Your program may no longer be catching your failures in advance, and this can lead to a loss in production, emergency repairs and even unplanned shutdowns. Performing annual audits on your lubrication program to ensure that it is delivering actionable results is highly recommended.

Many failures and incompetencies can hide behind a “good lubrication program” but with proper auditing and identification of where your lubrication program actually measures up, you can take actions to make it a successful program.

Stay tuned for part 2 where we will be diving deeper into the failure modes that are not being monitored.

Find the full article, "Hidden Failures in Lubrication programs: The Illusion of a Good Lubrication Program Part 1" featured on LUDECA's blog by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd

Lubricant Degradation / Reliability / Storage & Handling of Lubricants

ICML 55 – the revolution in the lubrication sector

What is ICML 55?

ICML 55 is revolutionizing the lubrication industry! It is so exciting to be around at this time when it has started its implementation. For those who aren’t aware of ICML 55, here are a couple of notes on it.

ICML 55 was born out of ISO 55000 which speaks to Asset Management. From this standard, 3 standards were developed to guide the lubrication industry since no previous standards existed within the lubrication industry.

ICML 55.1 - Requirements for the Optimized Lubrication of Mechanical Physical Assets
ICML 55.2 - Guideline for the Optimized Lubrication of Mechanical Physical Assets
ICML 55.3 - Auditors' Standard Practice and Policies Manual

ICML 55.1 has already been completed, while 55.2 should be done at the end of this year and 55.3 scheduled for 2020.

These are exciting times!

Here’s the official press release:

https://info.lubecouncil.org/2019/04/04/icml-introduces-icml-55-asset-management-standards-mle-engineer-certification/

While ICML 55.1 was only launched in April of this year (2019), it is a standard that the lubrication industry has been in need of for several years. It addresses the “Requirements for the Optimized Lubrication of Mechanical Physical Assets”.

What exactly are the assets covered? Here they are:

Rotating & Reciprocating Machines, Powertrains, Hydraulic Systems and lubricated subcomponents
Assets with lubricants that reduce friction, wear, corrosion, heat generation or facilitate transfer of energy
Finished products from API categories I-V
Non Machinery support assets (Personnel, policies, procedures, storage facilities and management)

There are also fluids and assets which are NOT covered:

Fuels, coolants, metal-working fluids, pastes, fogging agents, preservative fluids, coating materials, heat-transfer fluids, brake fluids, cosmetic lubricants
Solid lubricants (e.g., powders and surface treatments used as coating rather than to reduce friction between surfaces in motion)
Additives independent of the finished lubricant
Electrical transformer oils and anti-seize compounds
Fluids and materials derived from a petroleum or petroleum-like base
Fluids that do not serve a lubrication function

Photo Credit: https://info.lubecouncil.org/icml-55-standards/

ICML 55.1 speaks to the “Requirements for the Optimized Lubrication of Mechanical Physical Assets” it also describes and defines 12 interrelated areas that can be incorporated in a lubrication program. This has never been officially documented before, nor has any standard been published as a guideline for lubrication programs.

The 12 areas are outlined below:

SKILLS: Job Task, Training, and Competency
MACHINE: Machine Lubrication and Condition Monitoring Readiness
LUBRICANT: Lubricant System Design and Selection
LUBRICATION: Planned and Corrective Maintenance Tasks
TOOLS: Lubrication Support Facilities and Tools
INSPECTION: Machine and Lubricant Inspection
LUBRICANT ANALYSIS: Condition Monitoring and Lubrication Analysis
TROUBLESHOOT: Fault/Failure Troubleshooting and RCA
WASTE: Lubricant Waste Handling and Management
ENERGY: Energy Conservation and Environmental Impact
RECLAIM: Oil Reclamation and System Decontamination
MANAGEMENT: Program Management and Metrics

As per ICML's website, here's a list of people that the new standard can benefit:

Photo Credit: https://info.lubecouncil.org/icml-55-standards/

Check out the ICML 55 standards today and apply it to your organization!

Written by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd.

Storage & Handling of Lubricants

Colour Coding

What is the importance of Colour Coding?

Quite often when we are correcting or helping companies set up their lubrication storage areas, we get asked a lot of questions regarding colour coding.

Ideally, the concept of colour coding is to allow field personnel to easily identify and associate particular lubricants with their applications.

However, like most things in reliability, this can be customized to suit your organization. There are no hard and fast rules of using only yellow to represent hydraulic oils.

What if we had someone that was colour blind?

Usually, when we start colour coding lubricant storage containers, we include symbols and actual names of the lubricant. This helps to assist personnel in having a 3 point verification system.

First they can verify the colour, then the symbol and of course the name of the lubricant.

Names are crucial! Especially for varying viscosities (such as gear or hydraulic oils). For instance all gear oil would have the same colour and symbol but you wouldn’t want to put an ISO 100 gear oil in a gearbox suited for ISO 680.

Written by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd.

Storage & Handling of Lubricants

Lubrication Audit?

Audits usually get people nervous! They are worried about what the auditor may or may not find. When we perform lubrication audits, we’re trying to ensure that your equipment is using exactly what it should to perform efficiently.

Why is that necessary? We’ve found that in most organizations, there may have been a time when the OEM recommended lubricant was not readily available and a substitute was used instead. Once the substitute has been used, it magically becomes the recommended lubricant for the rest of the life of the component.

However, if proper checks were not done initially, then the component could be using the wrong lubricant for most of its life. This can contribute to downtime and replacement of parts before their actual useful life has been reached.

Once, we found a gearbox using an ISO 680 gear oil when it should have used an ISO 320 oil. This gearbox used the wrong oil for 30 years! It greatly impacted the efficiency of the gearbox and they experienced numerous breakdowns throughout its life but they never understood or dared to look at the lubricant.

Always ensure that you have the OEM recommended lubricants for your components!

Written by Sanya Mathura, CEO & Founder of Strategic Reliability Solutions Ltd.